Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: KANSAS LEASING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Appellant, v. DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL, Respondent-Respondent; Evelyn J. Klapholtz, Intervenor-Respondent.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Division of Housing and Community Renewal, dated December 4, 1996, which dismissed as untimely a petition for administrative review of an order of the District Rent Administrator dated December 26, 1995, directing a rent reduction, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lisa, J.), dated December 8, 1997, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
The evidence presented by the respondent Division of Housing and Community Renewal (hereinafter DHCR), including sworn statements of its employees concerning routine office procedures followed in mailing rent reduction orders, was sufficient to establish a presumption of receipt by the petitioner landlord, Kansas Leasing Limited Partnership (hereinafter the landlord) of the rent reduction order dated December 12, 1995. The bare denial of receipt by the landlord was insufficient to rebut the presumption (see, Matter of Panama Leasing Co. v. Division of Hous. & Community Renewal, 237 A.D.2d 444, 655 N.Y.S.2d 81; Jonathan Woodner Co. v. Higgins, 179 A.D.2d 444, 578 N.Y.S.2d 561). Accordingly, the petition for administrative review, filed far beyond the 35-day period of limitations contained in the regulations of the DHCR, was properly rejected as untimely.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: November 09, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)